Techdirt. Stories filed under "kentucky"Easily digestible tech news...https://www.techdirt.com/
en-usTechdirt. Stories filed under "kentucky"https://ii.techdirt.com/s/t/i/td-88x31.gifhttps://www.techdirt.com/Fri, 23 Jan 2015 15:44:00 PSTFark's Drew Curtis Running For Governor Of KentuckyMike Masnickhttps://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150123/14423329796/farks-drew-curtis-running-governor-kentucky.shtml
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150123/14423329796/farks-drew-curtis-running-governor-kentucky.shtmlFark, the super popular news aggregator that was sort of Digg before Digg, Reddit before Reddit and Hackernews before Hackernews -- but still unique in its own way. It's main claim to fame is the snarky one-line summaries of the various stories that it posts, and it's all around awesome. It's run by a guy named Drew Curtis, who is also pretty awesome, and who has long been engaged on various important issues related to the future of the internet and keeping it viable. Either way, in a bit of a surprise announcement Friday afternoon, he's announced that he's running for governor of Kentucky and his campaign website is like none you've ever seen before. It's not often that a political campaign kicks off with a Douglas Adams quote:

“It is a well-known fact that those people who most want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it.” – Douglas Adams

But Curtis is serious -- and mainly serious about having actual human beings, rather than politicians, be elected to key positions to bring about real change:

We have a theory that we’re about to see a huge change in how elections and politics work. Across the country, we have seen regular citizens stepping up and challenging the status quo built by political parties and career politicians. They have been getting closer and closer to victory and, here in Kentucky, we believe we have a chance to win and break the political party stronghold for good.

We are not politicians. We are Citizen Candidates.

Citizen Candidates evaluate ideas on merit, not on outside influence, campaign contribution sources, or party ideology. They believe a good idea is a good idea, no matter which political party supports it. Citizen Candidates are regular people with common sense. They are capable leaders who would be fantastic elected officials - if they chose to run.

Most don’t. And we can’t blame them.

The campaign talks about others, like Tim Wu and Zephyr Teachout, who basically came out of nowhere to have a major impact on the governor's race in NY.

While it's all too easy to be cynical about politicians and lobbyists and special interests, it's encouraging to see more people pushing back against those things, and actually looking to make a real difference. Whether or not this effort succeeds, we need more efforts like this, and I'm excited to see Curtis take a shot.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]>this-is-greathttps://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20150123/14423329796Wed, 16 Jul 2014 11:04:02 PDTWorld's Most Honest Candidate Gets IndieGoGo Funding For Kentucky Senate RaceMike Masnickhttps://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140716/05094827887/worlds-most-honest-candidate-gets-indiegogo-funding-kentucky-senate-race.shtml
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140716/05094827887/worlds-most-honest-candidate-gets-indiegogo-funding-kentucky-senate-race.shtmlMayDay SuperPAC a few times. However, down in Kentucky, a group called Represent.us is taking a different -- and potentially more effective -- approach to making people aware of the nefarious impact of money in politics. They've organized a satirical campaign for the Kentucky Senate by Gil Fulbright -- the most Honest Politician in Kentucky. Fulbright, of course, is played by an actor (Frank Ridley), but does a pretty good impression of a politician. To get a sense of his level of honesty, check out this campaign ad:

If you can't watch it, here's the opening transcript:

Hi! I'm Gil Fulbright. The people who run my campaign made this commercial and I'm in it. This campaign? It's not about me. It's about crafting a version of me that appeals to you. A version that visits random work sites with paid actors, pointing at things. A version of me that doesn't find old people loathsome or pointless. Has a conventionally attractive, yet curiously still, family. Listening to my constituents, legislating? These are things I don't do. What I do is spend about 70% of my time raising funds for re-election....

It goes on in that style and is pretty amusing. He's got some other commercials too, such as one for net neutrality and one for health care, both with the tagline: "I'm Gil Fulbright: for the right price, I'll approve any message."

Represent.us put together an IndieGoGo campaign to help fund their plan to insert Fulbright (satirically) into the high profile (and very expensive) Kentucky Senatorial race. He's obviously not running for real, but the idea is to piggyback on the spotlight on the Kentucky race between Mitch McConnell and Alison Lundergan Grimes, which is expected to cost $100 million (nearly all of it from out of state). As Represent.us explains how they'll make use of Fulbright's "campaign":

He'll crash campaign events, run “honest political ads” on TV and the radio, and do whatever it takes to get the whole country talking about money in politics corruption. We’re renting a campaign bus, slapping Gil’s beautiful face on it, and hitting the campaign trail to bring some much-needed honesty to one of the most expensive Senate campaigns in American history.

The IndieGoGo campaign quickly raised its targeted $20,000 (needed for a campaign bus), and is rapidly approaching the $30,000 for billboards. The team is hoping for even more to put some of their ads on TV as well. Obviously, this alone isn't going to move the needle on the question of money in politics, but greater attention from a variety of different angles can only help raise awareness.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]>satire-for-hirehttps://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20140716/05094827887Thu, 5 Dec 2013 11:11:41 PSTPolice Chief To Be Paid In Bitcoin, But Mostly As A Publicity Stunt GimmickMike Masnickhttps://www.techdirt.com/articles/20131204/17595325459/police-chief-to-be-paid-bitcoin-mostly-as-publicity-stunt-gimmick.shtml
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20131204/17595325459/police-chief-to-be-paid-bitcoin-mostly-as-publicity-stunt-gimmick.shtmlget his wish to be paid in Bitcoin very soon, after the city commission approved a measure saying that such a system is acceptable (taxes will be taken out in dollars before its converted to Bitcoin). While the story is interesting, the whole thing appears to be a publicity stunt. Vicco got a lot of attention a few months back when it was featured on the Colbert Report for having a gay mayor and passing a "fairness ordinance" against discrimination (the video is amusing, basically mocking those who falsely assume that "small town America" is anti-gay):

Police Chief Vaughn is among those featured in the video, talking about how Mayor Cummings is his best friend. After that show, the town discovered that a bunch of folks wanted to donate money to the town.

All together, the pledges and grant applications amount to more than $200,000, approaching Vicco's annual budget of about $300,000, Cummings said. Still, the town has only a tiny fraction of that money in hand.

However, both Cummings and Vaughn have talked about "capitalizing" on the attention, including appearing on a reality TV show:

The town may even become the setting for a reality-based television show. Cummings said he expects to review a contract proposal soon from a production company, but doesn't know which network might be interested.

He said he wants the show to focus on revitalizing the town.

"I don't see us being that entertaining, but somebody else seems to think we're a little unusual," he said.

A reality TV show where they show off how "unusual" they are? Suddenly the idea of a wacky police chief who gets his salary paid in Bitcoin seems like yet another "hook".

Also, Cummings and Vaughn seem to recognize that staying in the news -- and potentially getting more donations -- is part of the plan:

"I'm excited about it; it's a first for Vicco again," Vaughn said, referring to the city's fairness ordinance passed in January that prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation. The city was the first in the region to approve such a law, and at the time only the third in Kentucky.

But Cummings added that publicity isn't necessarily the only reason for the city to take such a step. Since the city's passage of its fairness ordinance and a subsequent appearance on Comedy Central's "The Colbert Report," officials have received several donations, including several pieces of playground equipment for a new park near City Hall. And now the city's upcoming website will be set up to accept Bitcoin donations, something Cummings said could help the small town of 300 people better afford projects to improve local infrastructure.

That's not to say that the plan isn't real, but it seems reasonable to ask if this isn't just another way to get a small town extra attention after its recent attention (and donations) started to die out. Vaughn's salary is still being based in dollars and just converted to Bitcoin, so his "salary" isn't in Bitcoin, he's just "paid in Bitcoin." And given the fact that the town itself is doing this at the same time that it's seeking donations and has set itself up to accept Bitcoin, it appears that this may just be a somewhat silly way to keep this small town in the news... and trying to get donations.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]>seems-a-bit-questionablehttps://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20131204/17595325459Thu, 18 Mar 2010 15:05:00 PDTKentucky Supreme Court Overturns Ruling That Blocked State Seizure Of Gambling Domain NamesMike Masnickhttps://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100318/1242508624.shtml
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100318/1242508624.shtmlseize those domains. The governor moved to do so on over 100 domains -- none of which had anything to do with Kentucky whatsoever. Amazingly, a judge agreed that the governor had every right to seize these domain names, despite the lack of a Kentucky connection. It's not hard to see how problematic a ruling this is from a jurisdictional standpoint. Thankfully, the state's appeals court overturned the lower court ruling. Separately, a UK court ruled that Kentucky had no right to seize UK-based domains.

The state appealed the ruling in the appeals court, and many assumed that the Kentucky Supreme Court would agree with the basic logic of the appeals court. Instead Ragaboo alerts us to the news that the Kentucky Supreme Court has overturned the appeals court ruling, effectively allowing the state to seize the domain names again. The ruling focused on a technicality, rather than on the merits -- arguing that the Interactive Media and Gaming Association (iMEGA) and the Interactive Gaming Council (IGC), two gaming associations who brought the lawsuit in the first place, had no standing in the case and could not bring the case in question.

"Instead of owners, operators, or registrants of the website domain names, the lawyers opposing the Commonwealth claimed to represent two types of entities: (1) the domain names themselves and (2) gaming trade association who profess to include as members registrants of the seized domains, though they have yet to reveal any of their identities."

The court even acknowledged that the lawyers on behalf of the associations made "numerous, compelling arguments endorsing the grant of the writ of prohibition," but that "(a)lthough all such arguments may have merit, none can even be considered unless presented by a party with standing."

Of course, it seems rather ironic that the issue here is standing, when you could just as easily ask what sort of standing the state of Kentucky has to seize a domain name based elsewhere? In the meantime, if any of the actual domain owners is willing to step forward, the case may be reheard -- and hopefully the Kentucky Supreme Court will rule against the state on the merits and the simple fact that seizing domain names that have nothing to do with Kentucky sets an incredibly dangerous precedent.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]>jurisdictional-messhttps://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20100318/1242508624Mon, 2 Nov 2009 20:20:00 PSTUK Court Says Kentucky Has No Right To Seize Gambling Domain NameMike Masnickhttps://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091030/0344456730.shtml
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091030/0344456730.shtmlseize the domain names. The governor has been pretty open that this has nothing to do with any moral issue over online gambling, but is a blatant attempt to help protect local gambling establishments in the state. Of course, it's ridiculous to think that a state governor could claim the right to seize domain names that are not based in Kentucky at all, and after a lower court (that didn't seem to understand the issue) sided with the governor, an appeal court overturned that ruling. Rather than recognize how silly this campaign is, the case is going to the state Supreme Court.

But, apparently the lawsuits aren't just happening in Kentucky. Michael Scott points us to the news that one of the companies targeted by Kentucky brought a lawsuit both against Kentucky and its own registrar in the UK to get a ruling that it is not subject to the whims of Kentucky politicians. The state of Kentucky ignored the proceedings, which resulted in the court agreeing that Kentucky has no right to seize the domain name. Of course, the state of Kentucky probably couldn't care much less about what a court in England thinks (which explains why it didn't even bother to respond), so the victory may be somewhat meaningless. However, at the very least, if Kentucky somehow wins its case in the US, perhaps the registrars in the UK can point to this ruling to refuse handing over the domain names.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]>not-that-it-careshttps://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20091030/0344456730Tue, 22 Sep 2009 04:12:01 PDTKentucky's Attempt To Seize Gambling Domain Names Goes To State Supreme CourtMike Masnickhttps://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090921/0314486264.shtml
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090921/0314486264.shtmlseize the domain names of a long list of over 100 sites that had something to do with gambling. The governor was basing this on a Kentucky law that let the government seize "devices" used for gambling, even though none of the sites in question were based in Kentucky. The governor -- who many say did this to protect local Kentucky gambling operations -- compared these website to "a virtual home invasion." While a judge originally was going to allow the seizure, the state appeals court overturned the ruling, saying that it was clear that a domain name is not a gambling device.

Rather than back down, the governor pushed ahead and is using taxpayer money to appeal the ruling. Ragaboo alerts us to the news that the Kentucky Supreme Court is getting set to hear the case. It's difficult to see how the governor has much of a leg to stand on here. He's trying to seize the domain names of businesses operated entirely outside the state. Allowing such a seizure of domain names would set a horrendous precedent and create all sorts of problems. Hopefully the Kentucky Supreme Court sees this, and Governor Steven Beshear realizes it's best to give up this dangerous crusade.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]>waste-of-kentucky-taxpayer-dollarshttps://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090921/0314486264Thu, 10 Sep 2009 19:09:25 PDTConnected Nation Bails On Its Home State Of KentuckyMike Masnickhttps://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090910/0320426150.shtml
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090910/0320426150.shtmlbizarre story of Connected Nation continues. While the telco-backed broadband mapping organization that politicians all seem gaga over has been able to sweep politicians in Minnesota and Florida off their feet, despite dubious qualifications and/or reviews, Connected Nation has apparently decided to bail out on bidding for the broadband mapping opportunity in Kentucky. This is significant, because Connected Nation is from Kentucky. It was originally Connect Kentucky, and it was the group's supposed "success" in mapping broadband deployments in Kentucky that led to the formation of Connected Nation. In other words, not only does Connected Nation actually have experience in Kentucky (unlike those other states), it should already have the maps. And yet it's suddenly claiming that it can't meet the deadlines laid out in the proposal? Art Brodsky questions the claim:

Is the deadline issue what chased Connected Nation out of Kentucky? Perhaps. There may be other factors at play, including that the Commonwealth wanted the vendor to work with all providers, and two of those significant sectors -- cable and municipals -- are not happy with the telephone-dominated nature of Connected Nation. It's also worth noting that the Kentucky state government, aware of the criticism of Connect Kentucky's efforts, was planning a very strict follow-up procedure for the stimulus mapping program. The Request for Proposals mentioned there would be a third-party verification of "any and all data at any location." That condition would seem to conflict with the general Connect philosophy of controlling access to the information. But we digress.

Given all this, it's worth asking: does the state of Kentucky have the broadband mapping data that Connect Kentucky did for it earlier? Can it give that data to other providers? Or must those providers start from scratch as Connect Kentucky takes its data and goes home?

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]>oddity-of-odditieshttps://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090910/0320426150Tue, 25 Aug 2009 21:18:57 PDTKentucky Cable Companies Point Out That Connected Nation Isn't All ThatMike Masnickhttps://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090825/0428055992.shtml
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090825/0428055992.shtmlfavored by the telcos -- to handle all of the "broadband mapping" needed for a better national broadband plan. There have been plenty of concerns about Connected Nation's close relationship with the telcos, as well as its proposal which wouldn't give a very fair or accurate picture of actual broadband offerings around the US. But a funny thing just happened. Connected Nation is really based on Connect Kentucky, where this experiment was first run, and the cable companies there have suddenly stood up to oppose Connect Kentucky, questioning its ability to accurately map broadband in the state. Looks like maybe the telcos should have cut the cablecos in on the deal before backing Connected Nation.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]>well,-look-at-thathttps://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090825/0428055992Fri, 20 Mar 2009 08:47:14 PDTKentucky Election Officials Arrested For Changing Votes On E-Voting MachinesMike Masnickhttps://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090319/2040534190.shtml
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090319/2040534190.shtmlcould be exploited -- but we hadn't heard of any cases of anyone actually being caught tampering with or trying to tamper with votes. That isn't to say it didn't happen. It's possible that it happened and the perpetrators weren't caught -- but it's a big leap from it "could" happen, to it "did" happen. So, most of our coverage here has been very much on the bugs and the flaws, rather than any of the conspiracy theories that floated around.

However, it appears that a group of Kentucky election officials, the circuit court judge and the county clerk, were arrested for changing votes in various elections between 2002 and 2006 on e-voting machines. The details suggest that there were two parts to the vote changing. First, there was traditional vote buying -- where they paid people to vote in a certain way. However, the second involved actually changing voters' votes on ES&S e-voting machines.

It didn't involve any hacking or direct security flaws -- but the elections officials made use of the confusing user interface and process of the e-voting machines to trick voters into leaving before their votes had been cast. That's because there's a "vote" button, that some people (silly them!) assumed meant they actually voted. Nope. It turns out that just gets you to a page to review your vote and then confirm it. However, these elections officials told people that once they hit vote they had voted -- and were then able to go in and change the actual votes.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]>security...https://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090319/2040534190Wed, 21 Jan 2009 03:13:00 PSTCourt Of Appeals Overturns Kentucky Gambling Domain SeizureMike Masnickhttps://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090120/2045263471.shtml
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090120/2045263471.shtmlseize over 100 domain names, claiming they violated a local state law against "gambling devices." None of the domains were run or hosted in the state of Kentucky, which made this quite a stretch in legal terms. While many of the domain names were for gambling websites, some were merely parked domains. The politicians who ordered the seizure were quite open that this was an attempt to "protect" local gambling interests -- but it seems like an incredible legal reach to claim that because of local protectionist laws, the state somehow has the right to seize domain names from around the world. The domain owners complained, but a local Kentucky state court ruled in favor of the government. However, an appeals court quickly told the state to hold off seizing the domains until it could review the case.

That court has now overturned the lower court ruling saying that a domain name is clearly not a gambling device, and is not covered by the law. However, this does potentially leave the door open for Kentucky politicians to change the law to include domain names... at which point we'll need to go through this whole silly legal battle all over again.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]>good-rulinghttps://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090120/2045263471Wed, 19 Nov 2008 16:59:00 PSTKentucky Appeals Court Tells Kentucky To Hold Off Seizing DomainsMike Masnickhttps://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081119/0317292881.shtml
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081119/0317292881.shtmlagreed to allow the state to seize 141 domain names as being "illegal gambling devices" despite having nothing to do with the state of Kentucky, other than being available on internet connections there (and everywhere else), an appeals court has now issued an injunction to stop the state from seizing the domains until the appeal can be heard. While we still have to wait for the full appeal, at least damage won't be done in the interim.

There's one other interesting note in the article, which is that Kentucky's Attorney General appears to be trying to distance himself from the case. Even though most state actions are normally taken by the AGs office, in this case, the lawsuit was filed by the state's Secretary of Justice and Public Safety (there's some question if it's legal for this person to bring the suit). Either way, the AG's name was on the case, but he's now specifically asked to have his name removed from the case. That seems like quite a statement. When even the Attorney General of the state wants nothing to do with the lawsuit, perhaps it's time for the state to admit it overstepped some legal bounds.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]>wait-just-a-second...https://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20081119/0317292881Thu, 13 Nov 2008 16:22:00 PSTEFF, ACLU Ask Court To Strike Down Kentucky's Domain Name SeizureMike Masnickhttps://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081113/1542002828.shtml
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081113/1542002828.shtmlallowed Kentucky's governor to seize a bunch of domain names that were related to gambling -- even if neither the owners nor the servers were based in Kentucky -- setting a terrible precedent. That's why it's good to see the EFF, the ACLU and the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT) team up yet again to ask an appeals court to overturn this decision. Hopefully the appeals court recognizes how truly awful the original decision was, and notes how it seems to violate multiple clauses of the Constitution.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]>good-for-themhttps://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20081113/1542002828Mon, 20 Oct 2008 06:33:00 PDTJudge Allows Kentucky To Seize Domain NamesMike Masnickhttps://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081020/0058002578.shtml
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081020/0058002578.shtmlseize 141 domain names that were somehow associated with gambling sites under a bizarre interpretation of Kentucky law. Pretty much everyone involved admits that this is just Kentucky's governor protecting local gambling establishments who supported him in the election. No one is even hiding the fact that this is purely about protecting the governor's political supporters from any sort of competition.

However, what's scary is in how the seizure is incredibly broad and far-reaching. None of the sites are based in Kentucky. Many of the sites are nothing more than holding pages, rather than actual online casinos. And, the law itself interprets these sites as "illegal gambling devices" which seems like a big stretch. There was some pushback, as people explained to the judge what an incredibly bad precedent this ruling would set -- as it would effectively allow any local law to be used to take possession of any website.

Apparently, the judge doesn't care. Late last week, the judge upheld the original ruling, giving one small out to the various sites. If they implement filters that block access to any IP address in Kentucky, they can keep their domain names. That's backwards. It shouldn't be the responsibility of a website that is just online to use geocoding techniques to comply with every single local law. If that were the case, the internet would ground to a halt, as any website would face so many different liabilities from so many different jurisdictions to make it impossible to comply -- and in each lack of compliance, face a potential seizure of the domain name. This is a bad ruling by any stretch of the imagination, made even more bizarre by the judge's unilateral ruling before a hearing was even held. The whole thing sounds quite questionable, and hopefully will be dumped on appeal.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]>bad,-bad-newshttps://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20081020/0058002578Fri, 10 Oct 2008 09:48:00 PDTKentucky's Gambling Domain Name Grab Sets A Terrible PrecedentMike Masnickhttps://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081009/1142502506.shtml
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081009/1142502506.shtmlseize the domain names of numerous online gambling sites, even though none of them were based in Kentucky, or even registered via Kentucky-based registrars. The whole thing smelled of corruption, given that the governor is closely tied to offline casino interests, and his campaign apparently included a big promise to bring more offline casinos to Kentucky. This effort seems mostly focused on not just blocking out online competitors, but seizing their domain names. Lots of people are pushing back and explaining how ridiculous the scenario is to the judge, noting, for example, that following similar logic would allow any country to seize any domain name. For example, China could decide that the BBC website violates its laws and demand that the BBC domain name be turned over to the Chinese government. Most folks would recognize that this is ridiculous -- but it's effectively what the Kentucky governor has done.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]>governors-who-want-more-powerhttps://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20081009/1142502506Wed, 24 Sep 2008 07:48:00 PDTKentucky Governor Seizes Online Gambling Domain NamesMike Masnickhttps://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080923/1851142353.shtml
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080923/1851142353.shtmlis using them to seize 141 domain names of sites that the state claims are used for illegal gambling. Of course, it appears that many of the domains aren't online gambling sites at all, but parked domains. The state doesn't seem shy about the fact that it's doing this to "protect" the horse racing business, but of course, throws in the moral argument as well:

"Illegal Internet gambling poses a unique threat to our Commonwealth. For individuals - particularly our youth - it is tantamount to a virtual home invasion. For some of our vital and most venerable legitimate enterprises, it undermines their exemplary regulatory compliance and siphons away their constituents."

Home invasion? Really? A parked domain is the equivalent of a home invasion?

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]>can't-have-competition-for-horse-racinghttps://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20080923/1851142353Thu, 19 Jun 2008 18:34:00 PDTKentucky Agrees To Stop Selectively Blocking State Employees From Reading Critical BlogsMike Masnickhttps://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080618/0028271441.shtml
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080618/0028271441.shtmlfiled a lawsuit saying that the selective blocking was a First Amendment violation. It looks like that issue won't get settled in court any time soon, as a new administration in Kentucky has decided that it is changing that policy and won't block critical sites, leading Public Citizen to drop the lawsuit.

Of course, without a court ruling, it's now not clear if the original actions were legal -- and there's nothing to stop a future administration from reversing the policy yet again. In the meantime, what kind of politician actually thinks it's a good thing to block out those who disagree with them rather than hear what they have to say? Talk about sticking your head in the sand...

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]>hearing-what-your-critics-say-is-a-good-thinghttps://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20080618/0028271441Mon, 10 Mar 2008 20:53:32 PDTKentucky Lawmaker Introduces Bill To Make Anonymous Cowards IllegalMike Masnickhttps://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080310/110506493.shtml
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080310/110506493.shtmlmake anonymous comments online illegal. I first saw the story on Digg, but it's been submitted about 30 times already and is starting to show up elsewhere -- sometimes with inflammatory headlines (including the one at Digg). First off, this is for Kentucky only. Second, the chances of the bill getting anywhere are slim to none. Third, even if it does miraculously pass, there is no way that it would be enforceable. In fact, even the guy who introduced the legislation admits as much. Fourth, the bill is clearly unconstitutional, violating our rights to anonymous speech (which has been reaffirmed many times by US courts). Fifth, it goes against section 230 of the CDA in that it puts the blame on service providers for the speech of their users, rather than putting the liability on the users themselves. In other words, while this gets some attention as a ridiculously bad bill, the chance of it actually going anywhere or having any impact at all is virtually nil.